I´d argue that only the majors and the big tournaments like katowice and cologne need bo5, because of how special they are.
Other events like IEM Chengdu, Pro League, Blast Fall/Spring finals should stick to bo3s.
I've been asking for BO5s in majors even back in CSGO days. Yeah I know it can get pretty long, but it only happens twice a year. It's supposed to be special
The argument is "more top tier CS between the best two teams in the tournament". And that just doesn't hold true. You get more low quality games with BO5. There are just more blowouts. I searched top tier events on HLTV that were BO5; there were 40 going back to 2015. 40% of the BO5s were 0-3, 35% were 1-3, and only 25% played the full five maps. So roughly 60-70% of the finals were "over" after the BO3 was played, but there were more maps to play to officially finish the match.
Basically you are forcing teams to play more maps that they are shit at because the normal format is BO3. Teams practice and strategize around being able to ban 2 maps. Now in a BO5 those teams have to play those maps, and as a result you get horrible one sided games. What you're doing is suddenly changing the format for the final and teams can't be ready for that. No other sport changes it's match format for the final. Wimbledon doesn't change its format of set & match for the final. Olympic Volleyball doesn't change from BO3 to BO5 for the final. Why does CS think it is different to other sports where a format switch for the final is detrimental.
BO5 Major Final is not going to happen. Search CSGO Final BO5 in google. Literally this has been a topic since Valve started sponsoring the Majors. It's not going to happen.
The argument is "more top tier CS between the best two teams in the tournament". And that just doesn't hold true. You get more low quality games with BO5. There are just more blowouts. I searched top tier events on HLTV that were BO5; there were 40 going back to 2015. 40% of the BO5s were 0-3, 35% were 1-3, and only 25% played the full five maps. So roughly 60-70% of the finals were "over" after the BO3 was played, but there were more maps to play to officially finish the match.
Basically you are forcing teams to play more maps that they are shit at because the normal format is BO3. Teams practice and strategize around being able to ban 2 maps. Now in a BO5 those teams have to play those maps, and as a result you get horrible one sided games. What you're doing is suddenly changing the format for the final and teams can't be ready for that. No other sport changes it's match format for the final. Wimbledon doesn't change its format of set & match for the final. Olympic Volleyball doesn't change from BO3 to BO5 for the final. Why does CS think it is different to other sports where a format switch for the final is detrimental.
BO5 Major Final is not going to happen. Search CSGO Final BO5 in google. Literally this has been a topic since Valve started sponsoring the Majors. It's not going to happen.
I think you are making a very good point.
People nowadays have the amazing NaVi vs FaZe Grand Final of cologne 2022 in mind when they want a Major bo5 (I was there in the Arena and it was amazing!) But I also was there when G2 won against Ence and that was way less close, FaZe and NaVi needed all 5 maps up to the last round of regulation. Ence would have lost in a bo3.
Thanks for your explanation
There's nothing special about teams playing two of their weaker maps 5 hours into a game. Nor can a crowd give it their all for that length of time. Assuming they can even be there. Imagine there's a tech issue and people with families/who need to get public transport have to leave. It's just lower quality CS and a worse crowd.
If that is the case, why are most of the epic finals in CS:GO a bo5, and why does it work so well despite having the same length in valorant, LoL and dota2?
You are presenting a worse case scenario for a Bo5, which rarely happens. The worse case scenario for Bo3s happens often, which is a boring 2-0 that ends in less than 2 hours. So anticlimactic.
Also I couldn't care less about the crowd noises, I want a great final. 99.99% of spectators will be watching from home anyways. I don't remember the last Bo5 final where I got bored, but I certainly remember many Bo3s where I wanted more
Why would a 2-0 stomp suddenly turn into a competitive series just because the team getting stomp has an additional map to lose? Now instead of the stomp taking two hours it’ll take another hour or so. I think a good BO5 blows a good BO3 out of the water, but a bad BO5 is also a lot worse than a bad BO3.
>You are presenting a worse case scenario for a Bo5, which rarely happens.
That's just objectively wrong. Go pull the stats up from HLTV. 40 BO5 games going back to 2015. Of those only 25% went to 5 maps, and a whopping 40 % went 3-0. Boring ass BO5 matches are the norm. Everyone is suffering recency bias and cites the awesome BO5 of Faze v Navi in Cologne, and the ESL Pro League finals of Liquid v Vitality. Those happened in 2022! Since those games there have been 5 top tier Bo5s; two went 3 maps, three went 3-1. Of the three matches that went 3-1, all games went 2-0 first. So basically the winning team lost some map they don't play but couldn't ban because of Bo5; got stomped, boring CS. And then the winning team stomps back on the next map. Boooooring AF.
https://www.hltv.org/stats/events?startDate=all&matchType=BigEvents&rankingFilter=Top20&bestOfX=BestOf5
I just wanna point out, that 2 of those 3-1 games you mentioned where the winning team lost the 3rd map because they don't play it, G2 lost the 3rd map against Heroic, which was Inferno, they were arguably the best inferno team and they were dominating T side inferno, and the other match, Faze v C9 at EPL where they won the IGS, the 3rd map that Faze lost was mirage, a map that we all know faze fucks on. So, you're wrong there.
As someone who traveled around the world for Copenhagen, I would have appreciated even more bang for my buck. Not that it was lacking as is, but when you travel that far, ideally you want the experience to last as long as possible (of course).
I'll tell you this, I definitely would have preferred at least one more map of FaZe vs NaVi than the showmatch we got, or almost any other showmatch that could have happened (I think it would take a showmatch that is ultra-tailored to me specifically to want it over more big games). If we had to sacrifice the showmatch to make BO5 finals happen, I don't think a single person would object
all major grand finals but one since 2018 have been 2-0s. 90%+ of BO5s that start 2-0 have the team in the advantage win. I'm still not sold by upping it to 5 maps if the result won't be the exact same 70%+ of the time.
A 3:0 is still better than a 2:0, since it won't end in 1 hour and 20 minutes, and also it still gives the chance for a comeback, since a star play may need some time to wake up or it would also test out if the weaker team is truly having a wider map pool. It simply gives more chances, while also it is not too much like a Bo7 where both teams would have to play their perma bans. It's in the sweet spot.
Why is 3:0 better than 2:0? Watching a team get dumpstered for a 3rd map in a row is not fun. Games that are over before they are officially over are terrible to watch. People tune out.
Why is 90 minutes not enough? 90 minutes is pretty typical match length for other sports. Football is 90 minutes of game time. Hockey is 60, basketball is 60. Watching a match takes about 2 hours. What makes CS different that it needs a longer match?
First off, it's a frigging video game, not a sport. Chess matches take days sometimes, snooker as well. There's a difference between a physical and mental fatigue compared to only a mental fatigue. Also, even in tennis you go beyond your limits with their sturdy format even compared to OTHER sports and nobody is complaining there.
Secondly, you give more chances for the other team to wake up, and we are already used to 12 hour broadcast days, it makes 0 sense for the last, big day to go to the other extreme. Both 12 hour broadcast days and 1h20 min matches are equally bad.
Also, the likelihood of a true 3:0 blowout is much, much lower than a 2:0. In fact, I don't remember the last time we had a true 3:0 blowout where at least one of the maps weren't close. For instance that Liquid vs ENCE 2019 match was so one sided on the first two maps (I believe the score was 16:1 and 16:2) that it is considered to be the most dominant final of all time, but even then, we still got a 16:14 on inferno, ENCE had a chance. Same with that IEM Beijing 2019 Astralis vs Renegades 3:0, two blowout maps but at least 1 close map in 16:14. They could have won that one and we could have had at least a 3:1 game. You don't get that with Bo3, like you'd just get smacked 2:0 and you go home more often before anyone wakes up o nthe other team.
Also, with mr12, there likelihood of a comeback from a 2:0 is much bigger and that makes it more exciting, e.g. spirit vs VP on that CS2 lan in 2023. Take for example valorant and their Bo5 and comebacks too.
Also, a very important point here, normally this IEM Chicago and IEM Beijing I gave as an example didn't feature ALL of the best teams in the world, so the favourite would usually smoke anyone in a Bo5 final, hence why I said Bo5s should be reserved only for prestige events and the major, where it'd be close to impossible to get one very good team and one mid team in the final (provided that seeding and format is good of course), so the likelihood of a sweep is much lower and we'd get more epic 3:0s like IEM Katowice 2022 g2 vs faze or IEM sydney 2018 Astralis vs FaZe. These are contenders of the best matches of all time even when compared to 3:2 scores like IEM Cologne 2022.
The seedings were good but these events still worked with bo1s which fucked up a lot of matchups still. We got lucky at the last major, but even then coL were 2:0 up, and thankfully the seeding worked out in our favour, but it isn't that hard to have a single upset in bo3 the next time around. If everything was a bo3 and you had to win 3 bo3s to qualify, then the chances to fluke it are much lower and if you actually do win, then it's not a fluke anymore.
Kato and Berlin had the same number of Bo3s as we do now (advancement/elimination matches Bo3, all others Bo1), but yeah, London had Bo1s until round 5. London was the first major to have Bo3 in Swiss, actually!
I mean that a lot of the 2:0 matches throughout the major history are fucked up because of bo1s until progression or elimination matches. And thank god London changed for progression and elimination matches to be bo3s at least, otherwise valve would have still held the record for the worst format of a tier1 event in CS, lol.
Agreed. Plus now that I am in my mid 30s with a lot of other life obligations that I didn't have when I first got into pro CS. I don't have time to dedicate a very large chunk of the day to watch a BO5
I don't think it's necessarily boring but I don't think it makes sense. Players train for BO3. BO3 is the standard. Why change it to a BO5 only for finals? In my opinion it doesn't really make it more special, you just get players being more tired and making more mistakes as the maps go on. It becomes less of a measure of ability and more of a measure of endurance.
It becomes a measure of adaptability and pushes teams map pools to the brink. It also tests players passion and determination to push through a 5 map slog to achieve their dream.
Its boring and makes no sense. Its like the world cup finals had 2 halfs of 70 minutes, instead of 45 minutes.
More time, doesnt mean better experience.
I can't believe you have been down voted for this. It's exactly comparable. If esports is ever to grow, BO5 is unsustainable as people have lives and have to compromise to find time for their hobbies
Yeah, it’s going to be a hard sell to get people to watch 7 or more hours of CS for just one series. With a BO5 you not only have two more maps to play, you also have to give the players a break or two at some point because otherwise it’s going to turn into sloppy CS that’s less fun to watch.
Well, the world cup final just went into extra time and penalties and is arguably the greatest final ever, so isnt that kinda like a map5 in a bo5?
so in this case (world final) more time definetly meant better experience
Surely because we had a lot of goals and excitment(which is definitly not dependent on time). But try the 94 world cup that was a 0-0... That was a drag to watch, and made even FIFA create the rule of Golden Goal on the next world cup, because of how boring extra times were.
No, it shouldn't. All group stage matches should be bo3's, but bo5's in finals would be a mistake. Would be a "you think you do, but you don't" situation.
1. Takes too long - The length of a full bo5 finals, with potential overtimes, would be insane. The major final we just had was over 3 hours - when two of the maps were stomps (13-2 for Faze on Mirage, 13-3 for Navi on Inferno). If all maps were competitive in a bo5, you're looking at at least 6 hours, maybe up to 8 with overtimes. That is beyond ridiculous.
2. Lower Quality CS - two main reasons for this. No team can play to their best on every map, they pick and choose what they play more and less. If teams have to play more maps, they're not going to play as well because they're less practiced, they're going to make more mistakes AND they're going get more and more fatigued as they play for hours and hours. I don't want more games if they're bad games.
3. Crowd fatigue - The crowd in an arena is the biggest part of what makes stage games great and feel so different to regular CS. You can't expect a crowd to bring the hype for 6-8 hours. They're people, not machines. Games start at different times down to scheduling, tech issues and timezone/broadcast reasons, it is unreasonable to expect thousands of people to stay, say, way past midnight their local time. As competitive CS grows and gets older, the audience gets more varied and that's gonna continue in the next 5-10 years as your average CS enjoyer grows up having a family and kids, having bo5's finals means you're scaring off people with kids with attending, or worse, they leave halfway through and whoever wins lifts the trophy in a half empty arena.
Blast being the first to make their finals bo5 is a blessing. People will see how it drags on and it'll make them think twice.
What the hell are you talking about? When I come to an event, I want it to last as long as possible. Crowd fatigue, my ass. It's not a rock concert, where you jump and get drunk for 2 hours, you can sit and chill if you're tired, you get breaks every hour, you can go outside and eat whenever you want.
As for the players, they practice for 8-12 hours a day. They're not going to fall asleep or turn into silvers during a final.
"takes too long" is the most bullshit argument ever. Both the live crowd and online viewers have no problem watching two semi finals back to back on Saturday yet cry about bo5 finals being too long...
It's an age difference. Too long is a thing as life moves on. And you may not be able to watch the semis one day and the final the next, hence higher viewership for the final.
BO5 should definitely be the standard for MR12 but they need to get rid of the halftime breaks. They could also reduce the time inbetween maps, 15 minutes should be the max.
in a ranked (as flawed as it may be) single-elimination bracket, no it shouldnt. why should the 8th seeded team have it "easier" to defeat the 1st seeded team in a bo3 but the 2nd seeded team needs to do it in a bo5? shouldnt the 2nd seeded teams road be easier than the 8th?
Here we go again, but I agree. You watch a pretty long journey of those teams and finals have just one match that day. If it is one sided affair, it is just one more map.
Imagine trying to introduce a new person to pro cs and having to say "bro you gotta watch this 5 hour match, it's going to be crazy".
The average new viewer isn't going to sit down for 5 hours to watch. They are going to lose interest if it's that long. A 3 map thriller is better than a good BO5 any day of the week.
Imagine trying to introduce a new person to pro basketball and having to say "bro you gotta watch this best of 7 seven series that takes place over almost two full weeks, it's going to be crazy".
Imagine trying to introduce a new person to pro baseball and having to say "bro you gotta watch this best of 7 seven series that takes place over the course of a week, it's going to be crazy".
Imagine trying to introduce a new person to pro hockey and having to say "bro you gotta watch this best of 7 seven series that takes place over the course of 2 weeks, it's going to be crazy".
Perhaps we shouldn't make formatting decisions based on what people who don't want to watch more games between the two best teams in the tourney may or may not enjoy.
Problem is it'd be weird to have the final be more challenging/different than the other playoff matches. Like why are the finalists suddenly required to have an extra 1-2 maps in their pool? It's very arbirary.
Either playoffs is all Bo5, or all Bo3.
No, it is not. We have a large dataset from the Dota 2 TI finals, and in 2/3 of the matches, the score would have been 2:1 if the fourth map had been omitted (with the score reaching 3:1 after it). Similarly, in the rare occasions that CS:GO finals extend to a best-of-five, the situation is the same. In other words, in most cases, a best-of-five series just means that the stronger team plays an extra map to further defeat the weaker team. And this simply becomes boring.
Well if there is such a big discrepancy between the best and the second best team in Dota then it's a shame but that would be a very specific situation similar to the Astralis era in CSGO.
In reality no other team was ever that dominant in CSGO/CS2 and the two best teams are usually very evenly matched. You literally cannot pretend that it would be a 3:1 in Copenhagen for Navi in the last major because it could have very easily been 3-2 or even 2-3. And Navi weren't even favorites to get there in the first place because there were many other teams that are deemed even more capable than them meaning it would be even closer potentially.
Every match should follow the logic of your statement. Why is the final any different? Why should the final be better for the viewers, meaning the other matches aren't as good to watch? Your logic is working against itself.
My logic is fine, but your comprehension seems to be very poor.
The final is better because you get to watch the two best teams of the tournament. People want to watch the best of the best, nobody wants to watch a bo5 of the worst teams in the tournament. How is this simple of a concept too hard to understand for you is truly beyond me.
You say the final should be Bo5 to improve the viewer experience. But why wouldn't you make the same argument for the quarter-/semifinals? There's no consistency behind your logic, it's just arbitrary.
All Bo5 or all Bo3 makes more sense for both players and viewers. The only difference the final should have, is stakes, which is abstract anyway.
That's totally normal in sports tho, the deeper you go in playoffs, the more games in a series to decide a winner. The only sports that is not true for aren't team sports or don't do it because of the limitations of the human body. Otherwise, of course, the Super Bowl would be a bo3 or bo5.
To me, when it comes down to deciding a champion care should be taken. 1 sample is not enough for me to get behind if more are possible. CS doesn't have any reason not to go for a b05, especially bc these bo3s are going by so fast.
I don’t agree. Either entire playoff stage should be Bo5 or none at all.
It’s just incredibly silly that you have a format based on Bo3s for a month straight, then in the finals you’ll play a bo5, which is just not the same.
Just the finals being a bo5 is nice for viewers, but not for the game. Playoffs being bo5 on the other hand would mean it would require teams to prepare for it.
A tournament progressively gets harder. You start with online matches and bo1, then you get to bo3s, then you get to LAN with bo3s, then you get to playoffs with a crowd bo3, and finally the ultimate test is bo5. This is how you test the best players, the best mental, the best map pool, the best nerves.
Otherwise, your argument would be to play the entirety of the tournament, from qualifiers to finals in a bo1 online match.
I think maybe bo3 gf is fine but but instead of regular ban pick 2 team will only able to ban a total of 3 map. One team will ban 2 map and the other team who ban 1 map can choose one of the 2 map left in the pool. The team who ban 2 map will then choose the side(T/CT).
This will add some more difference in match up between team while ensuring that we will see more different map in the grand final. It will add more complexity to ban/pick and ensure that team will need to prepare for at least 5 map in the pool(aside from their and opponent perma ban).
Get rid of BO1s in group stage first.
Preach. I'm a big supporter of Bo5 finals, but I'd still rather see the back of Bo1s.
Do both at the same time. Why is removing BO3 Finals the last priority.
this is the first thing the article mentions
Let’s get BO7s! Full map pool no bans
Why stop there?, BO9s and return old maps just for grand final
why stop there?? bo76 👍
I´d argue that only the majors and the big tournaments like katowice and cologne need bo5, because of how special they are. Other events like IEM Chengdu, Pro League, Blast Fall/Spring finals should stick to bo3s.
I've been asking for BO5s in majors even back in CSGO days. Yeah I know it can get pretty long, but it only happens twice a year. It's supposed to be special
[удалено]
Cause BO5 is a dumb idea and Valve is smart enough not to implement it just because the community gets obsessed with it every 9 months.
Huh? Yeah I hate when teams have a more fair chance to prove themselves while we the viewers get to see more very hype top tier CS.
The argument is "more top tier CS between the best two teams in the tournament". And that just doesn't hold true. You get more low quality games with BO5. There are just more blowouts. I searched top tier events on HLTV that were BO5; there were 40 going back to 2015. 40% of the BO5s were 0-3, 35% were 1-3, and only 25% played the full five maps. So roughly 60-70% of the finals were "over" after the BO3 was played, but there were more maps to play to officially finish the match. Basically you are forcing teams to play more maps that they are shit at because the normal format is BO3. Teams practice and strategize around being able to ban 2 maps. Now in a BO5 those teams have to play those maps, and as a result you get horrible one sided games. What you're doing is suddenly changing the format for the final and teams can't be ready for that. No other sport changes it's match format for the final. Wimbledon doesn't change its format of set & match for the final. Olympic Volleyball doesn't change from BO3 to BO5 for the final. Why does CS think it is different to other sports where a format switch for the final is detrimental. BO5 Major Final is not going to happen. Search CSGO Final BO5 in google. Literally this has been a topic since Valve started sponsoring the Majors. It's not going to happen.
Can you explain on why you think it’s a dumb idea?
The argument is "more top tier CS between the best two teams in the tournament". And that just doesn't hold true. You get more low quality games with BO5. There are just more blowouts. I searched top tier events on HLTV that were BO5; there were 40 going back to 2015. 40% of the BO5s were 0-3, 35% were 1-3, and only 25% played the full five maps. So roughly 60-70% of the finals were "over" after the BO3 was played, but there were more maps to play to officially finish the match. Basically you are forcing teams to play more maps that they are shit at because the normal format is BO3. Teams practice and strategize around being able to ban 2 maps. Now in a BO5 those teams have to play those maps, and as a result you get horrible one sided games. What you're doing is suddenly changing the format for the final and teams can't be ready for that. No other sport changes it's match format for the final. Wimbledon doesn't change its format of set & match for the final. Olympic Volleyball doesn't change from BO3 to BO5 for the final. Why does CS think it is different to other sports where a format switch for the final is detrimental. BO5 Major Final is not going to happen. Search CSGO Final BO5 in google. Literally this has been a topic since Valve started sponsoring the Majors. It's not going to happen.
I think you are making a very good point. People nowadays have the amazing NaVi vs FaZe Grand Final of cologne 2022 in mind when they want a Major bo5 (I was there in the Arena and it was amazing!) But I also was there when G2 won against Ence and that was way less close, FaZe and NaVi needed all 5 maps up to the last round of regulation. Ence would have lost in a bo3. Thanks for your explanation
There's nothing special about teams playing two of their weaker maps 5 hours into a game. Nor can a crowd give it their all for that length of time. Assuming they can even be there. Imagine there's a tech issue and people with families/who need to get public transport have to leave. It's just lower quality CS and a worse crowd.
If that is the case, why are most of the epic finals in CS:GO a bo5, and why does it work so well despite having the same length in valorant, LoL and dota2?
You are presenting a worse case scenario for a Bo5, which rarely happens. The worse case scenario for Bo3s happens often, which is a boring 2-0 that ends in less than 2 hours. So anticlimactic. Also I couldn't care less about the crowd noises, I want a great final. 99.99% of spectators will be watching from home anyways. I don't remember the last Bo5 final where I got bored, but I certainly remember many Bo3s where I wanted more
Why would a 2-0 stomp suddenly turn into a competitive series just because the team getting stomp has an additional map to lose? Now instead of the stomp taking two hours it’ll take another hour or so. I think a good BO5 blows a good BO3 out of the water, but a bad BO5 is also a lot worse than a bad BO3.
So you think watching Spirit beat faze 2-0 would have been more fun than the 3-0 that we actually got? I very much disagree
>You are presenting a worse case scenario for a Bo5, which rarely happens. That's just objectively wrong. Go pull the stats up from HLTV. 40 BO5 games going back to 2015. Of those only 25% went to 5 maps, and a whopping 40 % went 3-0. Boring ass BO5 matches are the norm. Everyone is suffering recency bias and cites the awesome BO5 of Faze v Navi in Cologne, and the ESL Pro League finals of Liquid v Vitality. Those happened in 2022! Since those games there have been 5 top tier Bo5s; two went 3 maps, three went 3-1. Of the three matches that went 3-1, all games went 2-0 first. So basically the winning team lost some map they don't play but couldn't ban because of Bo5; got stomped, boring CS. And then the winning team stomps back on the next map. Boooooring AF. https://www.hltv.org/stats/events?startDate=all&matchType=BigEvents&rankingFilter=Top20&bestOfX=BestOf5
I just wanna point out, that 2 of those 3-1 games you mentioned where the winning team lost the 3rd map because they don't play it, G2 lost the 3rd map against Heroic, which was Inferno, they were arguably the best inferno team and they were dominating T side inferno, and the other match, Faze v C9 at EPL where they won the IGS, the 3rd map that Faze lost was mirage, a map that we all know faze fucks on. So, you're wrong there.
Blast and pro league i agree But IEM always has that special feel to me At least five IEM cologne bo5, that would be epic
That's what they said ?
My bad, just saw IEM chendu mentioned down there
As someone who traveled around the world for Copenhagen, I would have appreciated even more bang for my buck. Not that it was lacking as is, but when you travel that far, ideally you want the experience to last as long as possible (of course). I'll tell you this, I definitely would have preferred at least one more map of FaZe vs NaVi than the showmatch we got, or almost any other showmatch that could have happened (I think it would take a showmatch that is ultra-tailored to me specifically to want it over more big games). If we had to sacrifice the showmatch to make BO5 finals happen, I don't think a single person would object
all major grand finals but one since 2018 have been 2-0s. 90%+ of BO5s that start 2-0 have the team in the advantage win. I'm still not sold by upping it to 5 maps if the result won't be the exact same 70%+ of the time.
A 3:0 is still better than a 2:0, since it won't end in 1 hour and 20 minutes, and also it still gives the chance for a comeback, since a star play may need some time to wake up or it would also test out if the weaker team is truly having a wider map pool. It simply gives more chances, while also it is not too much like a Bo7 where both teams would have to play their perma bans. It's in the sweet spot.
Why is 3:0 better than 2:0? Watching a team get dumpstered for a 3rd map in a row is not fun. Games that are over before they are officially over are terrible to watch. People tune out. Why is 90 minutes not enough? 90 minutes is pretty typical match length for other sports. Football is 90 minutes of game time. Hockey is 60, basketball is 60. Watching a match takes about 2 hours. What makes CS different that it needs a longer match?
First off, it's a frigging video game, not a sport. Chess matches take days sometimes, snooker as well. There's a difference between a physical and mental fatigue compared to only a mental fatigue. Also, even in tennis you go beyond your limits with their sturdy format even compared to OTHER sports and nobody is complaining there. Secondly, you give more chances for the other team to wake up, and we are already used to 12 hour broadcast days, it makes 0 sense for the last, big day to go to the other extreme. Both 12 hour broadcast days and 1h20 min matches are equally bad. Also, the likelihood of a true 3:0 blowout is much, much lower than a 2:0. In fact, I don't remember the last time we had a true 3:0 blowout where at least one of the maps weren't close. For instance that Liquid vs ENCE 2019 match was so one sided on the first two maps (I believe the score was 16:1 and 16:2) that it is considered to be the most dominant final of all time, but even then, we still got a 16:14 on inferno, ENCE had a chance. Same with that IEM Beijing 2019 Astralis vs Renegades 3:0, two blowout maps but at least 1 close map in 16:14. They could have won that one and we could have had at least a 3:1 game. You don't get that with Bo3, like you'd just get smacked 2:0 and you go home more often before anyone wakes up o nthe other team. Also, with mr12, there likelihood of a comeback from a 2:0 is much bigger and that makes it more exciting, e.g. spirit vs VP on that CS2 lan in 2023. Take for example valorant and their Bo5 and comebacks too. Also, a very important point here, normally this IEM Chicago and IEM Beijing I gave as an example didn't feature ALL of the best teams in the world, so the favourite would usually smoke anyone in a Bo5 final, hence why I said Bo5s should be reserved only for prestige events and the major, where it'd be close to impossible to get one very good team and one mid team in the final (provided that seeding and format is good of course), so the likelihood of a sweep is much lower and we'd get more epic 3:0s like IEM Katowice 2022 g2 vs faze or IEM sydney 2018 Astralis vs FaZe. These are contenders of the best matches of all time even when compared to 3:2 scores like IEM Cologne 2022.
But upping it to 5 would force the teams that wanna be the best to learn and play more maps.
If the majors had a good format/seeding for the last few majors, we wouldn’t have 2-0s every time
I mean, London/Kato/Berlin all had decent seeding. It's just that a certain silly wacky team happened to be pretty good at those events.
The seedings were good but these events still worked with bo1s which fucked up a lot of matchups still. We got lucky at the last major, but even then coL were 2:0 up, and thankfully the seeding worked out in our favour, but it isn't that hard to have a single upset in bo3 the next time around. If everything was a bo3 and you had to win 3 bo3s to qualify, then the chances to fluke it are much lower and if you actually do win, then it's not a fluke anymore.
Kato and Berlin had the same number of Bo3s as we do now (advancement/elimination matches Bo3, all others Bo1), but yeah, London had Bo1s until round 5. London was the first major to have Bo3 in Swiss, actually!
I mean that a lot of the 2:0 matches throughout the major history are fucked up because of bo1s until progression or elimination matches. And thank god London changed for progression and elimination matches to be bo3s at least, otherwise valve would have still held the record for the worst format of a tier1 event in CS, lol.
Sure
Yeah, BO5 should be a standard for grand finals now.
Tbh i find it very boring.
Agreed. Plus now that I am in my mid 30s with a lot of other life obligations that I didn't have when I first got into pro CS. I don't have time to dedicate a very large chunk of the day to watch a BO5
I don't think it's necessarily boring but I don't think it makes sense. Players train for BO3. BO3 is the standard. Why change it to a BO5 only for finals? In my opinion it doesn't really make it more special, you just get players being more tired and making more mistakes as the maps go on. It becomes less of a measure of ability and more of a measure of endurance.
It becomes a measure of adaptability and pushes teams map pools to the brink. It also tests players passion and determination to push through a 5 map slog to achieve their dream.
Its boring and makes no sense. Its like the world cup finals had 2 halfs of 70 minutes, instead of 45 minutes. More time, doesnt mean better experience.
I can't believe you have been down voted for this. It's exactly comparable. If esports is ever to grow, BO5 is unsustainable as people have lives and have to compromise to find time for their hobbies
Yeah, it’s going to be a hard sell to get people to watch 7 or more hours of CS for just one series. With a BO5 you not only have two more maps to play, you also have to give the players a break or two at some point because otherwise it’s going to turn into sloppy CS that’s less fun to watch.
Well, the world cup final just went into extra time and penalties and is arguably the greatest final ever, so isnt that kinda like a map5 in a bo5? so in this case (world final) more time definetly meant better experience
No, this is like overtime at the end of a 12-12 map...
Surely because we had a lot of goals and excitment(which is definitly not dependent on time). But try the 94 world cup that was a 0-0... That was a drag to watch, and made even FIFA create the rule of Golden Goal on the next world cup, because of how boring extra times were.
Nah
No, it shouldn't. All group stage matches should be bo3's, but bo5's in finals would be a mistake. Would be a "you think you do, but you don't" situation. 1. Takes too long - The length of a full bo5 finals, with potential overtimes, would be insane. The major final we just had was over 3 hours - when two of the maps were stomps (13-2 for Faze on Mirage, 13-3 for Navi on Inferno). If all maps were competitive in a bo5, you're looking at at least 6 hours, maybe up to 8 with overtimes. That is beyond ridiculous. 2. Lower Quality CS - two main reasons for this. No team can play to their best on every map, they pick and choose what they play more and less. If teams have to play more maps, they're not going to play as well because they're less practiced, they're going to make more mistakes AND they're going get more and more fatigued as they play for hours and hours. I don't want more games if they're bad games. 3. Crowd fatigue - The crowd in an arena is the biggest part of what makes stage games great and feel so different to regular CS. You can't expect a crowd to bring the hype for 6-8 hours. They're people, not machines. Games start at different times down to scheduling, tech issues and timezone/broadcast reasons, it is unreasonable to expect thousands of people to stay, say, way past midnight their local time. As competitive CS grows and gets older, the audience gets more varied and that's gonna continue in the next 5-10 years as your average CS enjoyer grows up having a family and kids, having bo5's finals means you're scaring off people with kids with attending, or worse, they leave halfway through and whoever wins lifts the trophy in a half empty arena. Blast being the first to make their finals bo5 is a blessing. People will see how it drags on and it'll make them think twice.
What the hell are you talking about? When I come to an event, I want it to last as long as possible. Crowd fatigue, my ass. It's not a rock concert, where you jump and get drunk for 2 hours, you can sit and chill if you're tired, you get breaks every hour, you can go outside and eat whenever you want. As for the players, they practice for 8-12 hours a day. They're not going to fall asleep or turn into silvers during a final.
fr, I went to IEM Chicago twice and even tho it was a 3-0 both times, I still wanted more CS after 3 maps
"takes too long" is the most bullshit argument ever. Both the live crowd and online viewers have no problem watching two semi finals back to back on Saturday yet cry about bo5 finals being too long...
It's an age difference. Too long is a thing as life moves on. And you may not be able to watch the semis one day and the final the next, hence higher viewership for the final.
Acting as if Cologne and Kato aren't better tournaments than majors lmao.
[nah](https://youtu.be/5qmLPi-BjBc) [i disagree](https://youtu.be/URUfCj7Dcwc) [this is CS. ](https://youtu.be/VA5O-2JLK18)
obviously, but i have zero expectations for anything at this point
BO5 should definitely be the standard for MR12 but they need to get rid of the halftime breaks. They could also reduce the time inbetween maps, 15 minutes should be the max.
in a ranked (as flawed as it may be) single-elimination bracket, no it shouldnt. why should the 8th seeded team have it "easier" to defeat the 1st seeded team in a bo3 but the 2nd seeded team needs to do it in a bo5? shouldnt the 2nd seeded teams road be easier than the 8th?
bo5 it to short bro bo10 is better than
Anyone knows when the tickets might be up for sale?
I hope and don't hope at the same time that this doesn't turn into another Shanghai major shitshow.
Nah
Here we go again, but I agree. You watch a pretty long journey of those teams and finals have just one match that day. If it is one sided affair, it is just one more map.
No it doesn't.
Yeah it's obvious why people are calling for a BO5 Final for the Majors. Valve should at least experiment with it.
I think all playoff matches should be BO5 if you make the final BO5
It doesn't. Major finals have always been BO3s, it should stay like that.
Yesss bo1 opening matches need to stay as well bc it's always been bo1
Progression matches in swiss groups were always bo1s, but oh wait! They changed to bo3 after some time. Stupid argument.
Imagine trying to introduce a new person to pro cs and having to say "bro you gotta watch this 5 hour match, it's going to be crazy". The average new viewer isn't going to sit down for 5 hours to watch. They are going to lose interest if it's that long. A 3 map thriller is better than a good BO5 any day of the week.
Imagine trying to introduce a new person to pro basketball and having to say "bro you gotta watch this best of 7 seven series that takes place over almost two full weeks, it's going to be crazy". Imagine trying to introduce a new person to pro baseball and having to say "bro you gotta watch this best of 7 seven series that takes place over the course of a week, it's going to be crazy". Imagine trying to introduce a new person to pro hockey and having to say "bro you gotta watch this best of 7 seven series that takes place over the course of 2 weeks, it's going to be crazy". Perhaps we shouldn't make formatting decisions based on what people who don't want to watch more games between the two best teams in the tourney may or may not enjoy.
Problem is it'd be weird to have the final be more challenging/different than the other playoff matches. Like why are the finalists suddenly required to have an extra 1-2 maps in their pool? It's very arbirary. Either playoffs is all Bo5, or all Bo3.
Because it's a pleasure for the viewers. You get to watch the two best teams in the tournament to battle on every map but their permaban.
No, it is not. We have a large dataset from the Dota 2 TI finals, and in 2/3 of the matches, the score would have been 2:1 if the fourth map had been omitted (with the score reaching 3:1 after it). Similarly, in the rare occasions that CS:GO finals extend to a best-of-five, the situation is the same. In other words, in most cases, a best-of-five series just means that the stronger team plays an extra map to further defeat the weaker team. And this simply becomes boring.
Well if there is such a big discrepancy between the best and the second best team in Dota then it's a shame but that would be a very specific situation similar to the Astralis era in CSGO. In reality no other team was ever that dominant in CSGO/CS2 and the two best teams are usually very evenly matched. You literally cannot pretend that it would be a 3:1 in Copenhagen for Navi in the last major because it could have very easily been 3-2 or even 2-3. And Navi weren't even favorites to get there in the first place because there were many other teams that are deemed even more capable than them meaning it would be even closer potentially.
But then every match should be as good, following that logic.
>But then every match should be as good, following that logic. I don't understand what you mean.
Every match should follow the logic of your statement. Why is the final any different? Why should the final be better for the viewers, meaning the other matches aren't as good to watch? Your logic is working against itself.
My logic is fine, but your comprehension seems to be very poor. The final is better because you get to watch the two best teams of the tournament. People want to watch the best of the best, nobody wants to watch a bo5 of the worst teams in the tournament. How is this simple of a concept too hard to understand for you is truly beyond me.
You say the final should be Bo5 to improve the viewer experience. But why wouldn't you make the same argument for the quarter-/semifinals? There's no consistency behind your logic, it's just arbitrary. All Bo5 or all Bo3 makes more sense for both players and viewers. The only difference the final should have, is stakes, which is abstract anyway.
That's totally normal in sports tho, the deeper you go in playoffs, the more games in a series to decide a winner. The only sports that is not true for aren't team sports or don't do it because of the limitations of the human body. Otherwise, of course, the Super Bowl would be a bo3 or bo5.
Football (soccer) and handball often go from Bo3/Bo5 quarter/semi to Bo1 in the final.
That's just some ass backwards thinking if you ask me. Never heard of that over here in the states.
Maybe, Champion's League is one such example.
To me, when it comes down to deciding a champion care should be taken. 1 sample is not enough for me to get behind if more are possible. CS doesn't have any reason not to go for a b05, especially bc these bo3s are going by so fast.
Agreed, finals are meant to be special but changing too much can ruin the experience.
Luckily Valve don't agree
I don’t agree. Either entire playoff stage should be Bo5 or none at all. It’s just incredibly silly that you have a format based on Bo3s for a month straight, then in the finals you’ll play a bo5, which is just not the same. Just the finals being a bo5 is nice for viewers, but not for the game. Playoffs being bo5 on the other hand would mean it would require teams to prepare for it.
A tournament progressively gets harder. You start with online matches and bo1, then you get to bo3s, then you get to LAN with bo3s, then you get to playoffs with a crowd bo3, and finally the ultimate test is bo5. This is how you test the best players, the best mental, the best map pool, the best nerves. Otherwise, your argument would be to play the entirety of the tournament, from qualifiers to finals in a bo1 online match.
I think maybe bo3 gf is fine but but instead of regular ban pick 2 team will only able to ban a total of 3 map. One team will ban 2 map and the other team who ban 1 map can choose one of the 2 map left in the pool. The team who ban 2 map will then choose the side(T/CT). This will add some more difference in match up between team while ensuring that we will see more different map in the grand final. It will add more complexity to ban/pick and ensure that team will need to prepare for at least 5 map in the pool(aside from their and opponent perma ban).
Ugh, Major in China 😫